Events
Newsletter
Lists
Watch/Listen
AI, Digital Gene Editing & Fusion: What Comes Next For NFTs
NFTs have entered a new stage of their life cycle—and the possibilities are endless for this next generation, aptly called Living NFTs.
CRISPR
As Gene Editing Advances, Scientists Race to Set Boundaries
Around the world, leading scientific organizations are moving quickly to implement new guidelines to govern the use of gene editing.
Why Do Kids Get Cancer? Promising Research is Underway.
Understanding how an old person’s disease develops in kids could offer clues about how to predict, or maybe even prevent, pediatric cancers.
New Cancer Concerns Shake Up CRISPR Prognosis
New studies connect gene editing with CRISPR technology to cancer, sending stocks plummeting and raising serious questions about the technology’s potential.
CRISPR Community Wrestles With Potential and Peril of Gene Editing
Scientists, academics and other stakeholders gathering in Boston lauded the potential of what CRISPR-powered innovation could offer society — and grappled with potential negative or unintended consequences from the still-nascent technology.
CRISPR’s Unknown Cousin—The Promising Genetic Boost
Radical gene-editing technology CRISPR is in the news and rightly celebrated, but another form of genetic manipulation, known as “boosting,” may reshape how we face a wide range of conditions. It shows dramatic promise for treating genetic diseases like hemophilia B and sickle cell disease, but could ultimately even help combat aging itself.
Whatever Happened to the Internet’s Promise?
Idealism helped build a massive global movement of free culture and the net. It may still offer a powerful outline of cyberspace governance: an equitable and enlightened arena, a benign ecosystem that interweaves people and machines. Unfortunately we’re not even close to that today. But it’s not too late to retrieve that vision.
Contradictions Abound in Public Opinions about Genetics
People are so opposed to GMOs that such food has often been banned, though studies find zero evidence it harms people. But paradoxically, when it comes to editing human genomes, many are eager to press forward. Yet here scientists themselves mostly call for caution, because little is known about long-term ramifications.
For Genome Editing, Self-Regulation Beats a Government Ban
A breakthrough method that makes editing the genes of living beings relatively easy, called CRISPR, is much in the news these days. So are the many implications—both terrifying and promising—associated with it. The seemingly endless possibilities of genome editing have even the scientific community on edge, and it’s stirring up heated debate about where the ethical limits are. At the moment, most of the calls for restraint in the use of CRISPR are coming directly from scientists, but it won’t be long before government officials or candidates hoping to be elected start airing their opinions about how this field should be regulated. It’s worth taking a moment to consider how different modes of oversight could affect the opportunities afforded us by genome editing.
National Academy of Sciences Wades into CRISPR-Cas9 Debate
In response to growing concerns about the potential application of CRISPR-Cas9 technology, the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine are convening an international summit this fall to “explore the scientific, ethical, and policy issues associated with human gene-editing research.” If you think of a genome as a manuscript, full of extraneous, unnecessary, sometimes flat-out harmful material, the CRISPR-Cas9 technique can be likened to an incredibly useful editing tool. In biological circles, the conversation is heated. Some see remarkable opportunities to prevent the kinds of genetic diseases that impact millions of people a year, things like cystic fibrosis, sickle cell, hemophilia, and more. Others see yet another Pandora’s box that could lead to things like designer babies or the unintended genetic mutations that lead to unimaginable consequences.
